What is going to be the next big Suburb of the Twin Cities? (Minneapolis: real estate, mortgages)

[knke0204]

What city is going to be the next big suburb of the Twin Cities?

In the 1970's it was Brooklyn Park growing from a small potato farming community of 26,000 to an inner ring suburb of 43,000 in 1980. Same can be said for Maple Grove, growing from 6,000 to 20,000 in 1980 to 61,000 now.

In the 1980's it was Eden Prairie that grew from 16,000 people in 1980 as a rural fringe community to 40,000 in 1990 and a full-fledged upper class suburb. Eagan also grew from 20,000 to 47,000 in that decade.

The 1990s saw Woodbury grow from 20,000, a sleepy rural community to a suburb of 47,000 by 2000. Lakeville also grew from 24,000 to 43,000.

The 2000's saw major growth in Plymouth from 65,000 to 81,000. Blaine grew from 44,000 to 57,000...

So what is this decade's big grower?

Maple Grove has tons of room for development and keeps growing. Expansion this decade of 610 could have a lot to do with that...

Any thoughts?

[iNviNciBL3]

in the 2000s Woodbury also grew even more from 46,000 to 61,000
also in the 2000s Blaine grew from 45,000 to 57,000 and Shakopee from 20,000 all the way to 37,000

I think Shakopee will continue to grow considering there is alot of undeveloped land south of 169
By 2020 im guessing Shakopee will have a population of about 45,000

Farmington has also been growing rapidly
1990: 6,000
2000: 12,000
2010: 21,000
and again like Shakopee with all its undeveloped land it will also keep growing pretty quickly
By 2020 Farmington may have a population of about 40,000

2020 also will be the year Plymouth surpasses Bloomington as the most populated suburb

Also how far is 610 going to expand?
Will it just follow County Road 81 and connect to 94?

[golfgal]

Originally Posted by BobMarley_1LOVE

in the 2000s Woodbury also grew even more from 46,000 to 61,000
also in the 2000s Blaine grew from 45,000 to 57,000 and Shakopee from 20,000 all the way to 37,000

I think Shakopee will continue to grow considering there is alot of undeveloped land south of 169
By 2020 im guessing Shakopee will have a population of about 45,000

Farmington has also been growing rapidly
1990: 6,000
2000: 12,000
2010: 21,000
and again like Shakopee with all its undeveloped land it will also keep growing pretty quickly
By 2020 Farmington may have a population of about 40,000

2020 also will be the year Plymouth surpasses Bloomington as the most populated suburb

Also how far is 610 going to expand?
Will it just follow County Road 81 and connect to 94?

I can't see Farmington growing that fast yet. There is just too much land closer to the cities (Eagan, Apple Valley, Lakeville, Roseount) that is slated for development already and the schools are better in these other communities. I think if Farmington expected that amount of growth in the next 8 years they would have built a bigger high school. I know the huge land swap development in Rosemount is slated to bring in about 20,000 over the next 15 years or so but until the housing market turns around, no town is really going to grow much.

Does Plymouth have the employment base to top Bloomington?

In the early 80's Eagan had about 5000 people, now they have over 60,000.

[west336]

It OUGHT to be Woodbury, Maple Grove, Brooklyn Park, Blaine, Plymouth, Shakopee and Eagan. My 2020 prediction for each are (assuming no moratoriums or any other major obstacles):

Woodbury: 80,000 (from 61,000 today) +19,000
Maple Grove: 80,000 (from 61,000 today) +19,000
Brooklyn Park: 87,000 (from 72,000 today) +15,000
Blaine: 75,000 (from 57,000 today) +18,000
Plymouth: 85,000 (from 70,000 today) +15,000
Shakopee: 55,000 (from 37,000 today) +18,000
Eagan: 75,000 (from 60,000 today) +15,000

For the most part though, I don't expect far-flung suburbs/exurbs to be nearly as popular this decade compared to previous decades, and I expect a lot of the metro area growth to occur in 1st-ring suburbs and particularly, Minneapolis and St. Paul core cities. The suburbs listed above are either, a.) relatively close to the core, b.) lie on existing freeways or mass transit routes, or c.) have large pre-existing economic bases (like Target in Brooklyn Park) or other attractions (Blaine Soccer complex or Shakopee casinos and Valley Fair). Other exurbs such as Stillwater, Rogers, Buffalo, New Prague, Chaska and the like may do well because they have major distribution centers and/or are expecting more (Rogers) or are "charming" small towns that have their own pre-existing infrastructure and services (the rest).

My prediction for the core cities:

Minneapolis: 445,000 (from 385,000 today) +60,000
St. Paul: 300,000 (from 280,000 today) +20,000

Altogether, I expect the metro area to grow about 15% this decade (compared to 11% last decade, and 14% in the 90's) driven by relatively strong economy/unemployment, immigration, milder temps (wild guess), and a flight to cities with strong urban cores in the Midwest/Northeast/West.

Crazy, I know!

[DaPerpKazoo]

I too see a larger proportion of growth occurring in the central cities and inner-ring suburbs this decade than in the last few. I think that the further-out suburbs that see a lot of growth will be those with their own large employment bases, and also those that aren't all that far out. For example, I would expect Plymouth and Maple Grove to keep growing at a relatively steady pace because of the large employment bases with good jobs nearby in Plymouth, Brooklyn Park, and Golden Valley.

I think 60,000 is a big of a high-ball estimate for Minneapolis-- I would be happy to see it, of course, but I think 30-45,000 is much more realistic. I could also easily see an additional 10-20,000 in Saint Paul.

I would expect some continuing growth through redevelopment in some of the inner suburbs like Roseville, Richfield, Saint Louis Park, and Edina.

I think growth will really slow down south of the river. Perhaps it's just me and who I've known growing up, but I've always felt like the southern suburbs were super isolated-- and I'm not just being my usual anti-suburb self-- they feel considerably more cut off from the rest of the city than places like Maple Grove or Woodbury, ect, and I cant think of any major employment centers with professional jobs down there.

[uptown_urbanist]

I agree with DaPerpKazoo. Plymouth has both room for development as well as a lot of employment bases, so I would think it will continue to grow. Inner-ring suburbs are going to continue to benefit from those who don't want to live far out, and they are experiencing redevelopment. SLP will, I think, really benefit once the LRT line gets going -- they've seen a lot of redevelopment as it is, and I think that will only continue to grow. Same thing with Hopkins. Shakopee and Chanhassen could continue to grow since they are relatively convenient to the job center in Eden Prairie.

[Glenfield]

There are still a lot of empty houses all over the cities, and especially in the fourth ring suburbs. It seems to me that the real estate boom that enabled people to trade from one house to another is over. Not paused, but done. Absent that kind of price appreciation in their primary residence, and with so many people under water on their mortgages, I don't see people having the dough to do much moving around at all.

[golfgal]

Originally Posted by Glenfield

There are still a lot of empty houses all over the cities, and especially in the fourth ring suburbs. It seems to me that the real estate boom that enabled people to trade from one house to another is over. Not paused, but done. Absent that kind of price appreciation in their primary residence, and with so many people under water on their mortgages, I don't see people having the dough to do much moving around at all.

Where?? There are not a lot of empty houses around here.

[iNviNciBL3]

Originally Posted by golfgal

Where?? There are not a lot of empty houses around here.

Chiscago, Isanti, Sherburne, Wright and Scott Counties
if your gonna post here can you at least answer the question
"What city is going to be the next big suburb of the Twin Cities?"
I'm also curious what people have to say

[Hans Licks]

Rochester